Teachers Union Opposes Virtual K-8 Charter School

theodp writes "'You can't sit a child in front of a computer and expect him to learn things he needs to succeed in society,' said unimpressed Chicago Teachers Union president Marilyn Stewart of the Chicago Virtual Charter School, which will open to Chicago elementary school students this fall if approved by the state board of education."

Comments

But of course you can

[A beautiful mind]

First post!

(an essential skill...)

Re:But of course you can

[plague3106]

Its important to learn social interactions, which you DO get in current school systems.

The problem is that you also learn negative solical interactions; i.e. getting picked on, bullied, etc. So it is a crap shoot as far as helping kids be social. I learned to be not very social and it was years before I became more outgoing after my experiences in school.

Re:But of course you can

[PunkOfLinux]

I'm a firm believer in the theory that teaching a kid "Well, that's what the real world is like," too early will end up essentially keeping the same system in place. Rather than say "Go with the flow, that's the way things are," I think we should be saying "If you don't like the way something is, then change it!" Schools place too much emphasis on obedience, without teaching kids anything about thinking for themselves.

Re:But of course you can

[RsG]

Couldn't have put it better myself. Where the hell are my mod points when I need them?

I went through the public school system; my younger brother was home schooled. Guess which one of us is the cynic? Saying he "wasn't taught what the real world is like" is a compliment; it's better not to see injustice as "normal", just because that's the way things looked growing up.

As a side note, he's become the more gregarious of the two of us. I'd say anyone who assumes you need public school in order to become socialized is either completely ignorant of what they're talking about, or else their cross section of "home schooled" kids are the previous generation of religious kids who were taken out of school by their parents.

Re:But of course you can

[rainman_bc]

Schools place too much emphasis on obedience, without teaching kids anything about thinking for themselves.

Dude, kids are incapable of thinking for themselves, especially in the grade school years. They need to be taught the difference between right and wrong before they can be taught how to ascertain whether something is right or wrong.

The real problem is that parents have too many escapes nowadays from parenting. The TV and video game consoles offer more stimulation to children than anything else, so they are captivated by it. And parents need to get things done, so they don't mind dumping off their kids in front of the TV for a few hours while they do some house work. Seems to me people have the attitude that if my kid is in front of the TV, at least I know they are safe, right?

Few children will actually turn of the TV or the Video Games and open a book and do some reading. When a child reads, they become better spellers, and better writers. They learn good habits. The TV is a waste of time, even educational shows.

Re:But of course you can

[Shajenko42]

Schools place too much emphasis on obedience, without teaching kids anything about thinking for themselves.

That's actually one of the main purposes of compulsary public schooling - to enforce the status quo. I recall very early in my schooling that I was punished for working further ahead in the lessons than the rest of the class.

The Underground History of American Education.

Re:But of course you can

[soft_guy]

That's not what is going on in the article, though. The online school is basically there to help parents who are home schooling their children.

Frankly, there are a lot of things that children "learn" in school that I think are counter productive. We just moved to New York (Long Island) this year (from the west coast), and the school here is terrible. All the kids are "dating" in 5th grade (which I think is the parent's fault). The school has dances for 5th grade. They are two years behind where her old school was in pretty much every academic subject. The kids are allowed and even encouraged to use profanity in school.

So, next year she will be attending a private school. One semester at the crappy New York school is too much.

Re:But of course you can

[VGR]

Why, pray tell, is school not "real life".

Remember that jerk in school who used to punch a select few nerds in the head as hard as he was able? Remember how the teacher always ignored it?

Go try that in "real life." Punch someone in the office like that. Or even your neighbor. Let me know how it turns out.

The absurdly antisocial behaviors which go on in schools every single day are things that no adult would put up with in the workplace for an instant.

Re:But of course you can

[RsG]

You're trolling. But what the hell.

Virtually every single person in this article thread, and in TFA itself, is using non-scientific evidence, especially anecdotes. See the post further down by some AC about "Lauren" the college dropout he taught who was home-schooled. It therefor stands that, if nobody is linking studies/research at all, one anecdote is as good as another. Your only valid counterpoint would be a scientifically credited link; as it stands my direct experience is more valid than your uninformed opinion (neither of us is being scientific).

What proof is there anyway? Even if you could study the students (this is being done BTW, my brother was tracked by one such study), then any data gathered over the last few decades will be skewed by the number of religion based home schooling.

As for comparisons between the two of us, we're damn similar people. Close to the same intelligence, similar academic performance (I test better, he get's his assignments done more often), similar personality. Why do I dislike people far more than him? I was taught froma very early age that people are scum. He never learned that lesson.

However, learning that lesson did me no practical good, whereas ignorance has actually benefitted him. We have wound up at about the same place in life as well, so arguements that I must have a better job/higher education/whatever don't fly.

And even if he were more gregarious than me, all you've proved is that, in our case, which system we went through had no positive or negative impact on our lives. Ie, home schooled kid fairs no worse than public schooled kid when all other variables are as close to identical as possible. Which would still be an arguement in favour of home schooling.

Why not?

[Moraelin]

Why not? Back in my day, I sat all evening in front of the computer, and I learned all I need about functioning in society. Don't ninja-loot, don't let your pet aggro the whole room if you're a Warlock, get your shield from the vault before joining a raid if you're a Warrior or Paladin... err... ok, I see what you mean.

Re:Why not?

[Praedon]

To be very honest with any comments like this, and comments that bash schools online, everyone should take the time to visit a site called Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow. If it wasn't for this possibility, students that made a few bad mistakes, young teenage parents, and socially impaired individuals that I knew growing up would have just ended up dropping out all together and getting their GED. Instead, they got their high school diploma.

To anyone who thinks it isn't possible to sit in front of a computer at home to go to school, and actually learn, my sister was one of those people who graduated from Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow. I have never seen such a determined school in all my years of moving, relocating, and some REALLY bad experiences with normal schools. When I graduated back in the day, Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow JUST Came out, and I wish every day it would have came out a few years earlier.

The importance of having the option to elect out of a public school system, and to go to school online, is the best thing that has ever came to Ohio. For those individuals that can't handle the daily routine of public school systems, and the people who needed the extra help and support, that basically ALL School systems should cater to anyways, ECOT Is there for them here. It is a real school in Columbus, and they even have events, field trips, prom, graduation, and support staff that will work with you for at least several years after you graduate, to make sure you have someone to go to, if you needed that help.

We all know what kind of things happen in a public school system, and we know what can happen in a private school system. People can be so mean at times, and can knock other peoples self-esteem to no end. With ECOT, the people that I knew that used it, had their confidence boosted up, their self-esteem up, and they admitted to learning more at ecot than they ever did.

So think about that, when any of you take cracks at a Electronic Classroom... Cause if you farted around, they took their learning experience seriously, and normally you were suspended for not doing your homework and course work online. They were the only people to actually care for those, who felt they didn't fit in, and lost their self-esteem when others knocked it down. All Electronic Online Classrooms should be molded like ECOT.

Not the best idea

[Mr. Underbridge]

As the article says, you can't learn social skills sitting in front of a computer. And some of the people here on slashdot prove that. However, this is Chicago, and the public schools there ain't so safe. The article didn't mention it, but for families whose choices are 1) Send their kids to public schools where they'll either become criminals or get beat up by them, or 2) Use this virtual school, well, I'd keep them home. A lot of people in Chicago home school because the private schools are very expensive and the public schools are terrible.

Re:Not the best idea

[Mr. Underbridge]

I think that you're too worried about the mere possibility of them becoming a bad criminal or getting beat up by them, when if they don't interact with kids of their own age then they're *definitely* going to become pretty fucked up.

Depends on the school. When you think "public school," you're probably thinking of the ones near where you grew up. In that case, dealing with the annual wedgie is no reason to pull the kids out of school. However, I think they may be much worse in Chicago than you might be used to. In many of these schools, violence is pretty much guaranteed. Now I'm definitely against home schooling - those kids turn out like complete losers way too often - but if your school has a statistically defined murder rate, I'll take the loser over the dead kid.

I think a much better solution to your problem is to instead try and clean up the schools and get rid of the little arseholes in there.

I'd have to agree with you, but the bleeding hearts in this country would never let that happen. To them, it's apparently better to subject 1000 kids to daily violence and a shitty education than to "leave behind" a few kids. Since that choice (getting rid of the arseholes) isn't available to parents, you have to get your kid away from the arseholes. Sometimes, some form of home schooling (or charter schooling) is the only real option.

Fortunately, the wife and I are very lucky, as we have good jobs that allow us to live in a very good area that has probably the best public schools (non-magnet) in the country. So, unless we pack up and move to Compton, our kids will never have to face that. But for parents who are not so lucky, it can be a hard decision when your kid gets beaten up everyday. Or when you start hearing about kids bringing guns to school. Or when your kid starts getting pressured to join a gang. Or when your 12 year old daughter starts getting hit on a little too strongly by convicted 17-year-old rapists. At that point, you do what you have to do to get them out.

Re:Not the best idea

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

If kids attend classes online for fear of being shot at in the 'real' school, they're gearing themselves up for a life out in the 'real' world where they're just as likely to get shot.

Bullshit. The norms of the real world are nothing like the norms of a second level school. A second level institution operates in its own private sub-culture that is almost totally detached from reality. It's a morbid, almost fantastic perversion of the way the world normally works.

Do you have people in your place work work running around throwning pieces of half eaten fruit at you? Do you walk down the corridor past groups of senior members of staff and have them push or trip you over? Do you have to put up with people screaming, laughing and joking as you try to get work done? Are you prohibited by law from leaving if any of these things happen?

This kind of thing does not go on in primary education, or teritiary, or in the real world. It's a phenomenon peculiar to second level institutions only, and is the result of good intentioned efforts to educate teenagers by surrounding them with other teenagers with little meaningful adult contact.

People don't learn how to socialise in secondary schools. In most cases, they have to unlearn bad social habits they picked up there. If you want your child to learn how to socialise, have them socialise with adults more often.

Re:Not the best idea

[dheltzel]

Now I'm definitely against home schooling - those kids turn out like complete losers way too often

You need a bigger sampling. I home school my kids and and know dozens of other home school kids and not a single one is a "complete loser". In fact, they are (compared to both public and private schooled kids) much better socialized, better mannered, and better educated. When my oldest daughter was 10, she could hold an intelligent convo with an adult, and probably even teach them some algebra concepts, yet when she entered a private school in the 10th grade, she was immediately accepted socially among her peers (and the teachers). Her first semester at college she got a 4.0 and is on the student government. And I'm just as proud of my 16YO son, who clearly likes being home schooled, he's got a great job and a car he paid for, he's learning piano (his idea) and is very active in a number of teen groups, even leading some of them. So the idea of home schooled kids being poorly socialized is a complete non-starter. For every "loser" who you can find that was home schooled, I bet I can find a dozen in the public school system that are worse.

So your sample of home schoolers is obviously tainted. I respect your right to not home school your kids, but if you're going to argue that public schools produce better kids, you're going to need to fudge a lot of statistics. Maybe you could borrow some ideas from the MS "Get the Facts" campaign about how to twist statistics to your benefit.

The main reason that home schooled kids do so well on tests, in college, and later is life, is because their parents are highly involved. This is the same advantage that the cyberschools have and the reason that the teachers unions hate them (and home schoolers) so much.

Teacher unions are no different than the AFL-CIO, they exist to protect the jobs of their members and get them more money, their "concern" about the childrens education is just a pretext, like the auto workers union's "concern" about the quality of the cars they produce. Childhood education is just a product that they produce in order to make money for themselves. So, don't ever be surprised that they come out against anything that might reduce their control of education, they would suggest shutting down all private and parochial schools if they could get away with it.

Re:Not the best idea

[d3ac0n]

I think we need to keep in mind that Western-style schooling is a bit of an anomaly, historically speaking. It's actually MORE normal for children to spend more time at home with family than kids do today. Even throughout America's history, home-schooling and private-schooling were much more the norm than public-schooling.

I would posit that the public school system as it stands today is actually more HARMFUL socially to our kids than helpful. This is mostly due to the large class sizes, the overall lack of discipline and the lack of healthy student-teacher interaction. This is not something that is really "fixable" within our current structure. Teacher's Unions have too much power, and things are too centralized in a large and inefficient government beaurocracy.

Learning is a highly personal experience. It is something that should be done OUTSIDE a large social atmosphere where peer pressure and concern with social standing can take mental precedence over learning the material at hand. Also, by personalizing the learning experience, one learns self-assurance and the ability to work alone and self-start. These are CRITICAL skills in society today. Those in public schools who learn these skills do not do so BECAUSE of public schools, but DESPITE public schools.

We need to encourage the uptake of more Teleschooling and small, private schools, and get away from large, Socialistic beaurocratically run schools. It's in our kid's best interests.

Re:Not the best idea

[WhiplashII]

Since there are a lot of people asking, here is how schools work in Chicago:

There are 3 levels: Gifted, Magnet, and normal. To get into gifted, you have to test highly (they administer tests to 5 years olds, no kidding) - only 1 in 40 to 1 in 100 that apply get in. To get into a magnet school, you have to be lucky - it is a random lottery (about 1 in 10), though you can apply to any that you want (unfortunately, it is heavily weighted by race - so if you are white you are virtually guaranteed to be accepted into a school in an area of town that would literally get you killed). The normal schools are done by geography - and there is only one that you are assigned to. These are the school with guns+kids - even though you have to pass through metal detectors to get in.

Almost everyone that can afford it goes to a private school, or the magnet and gifted schools. So the normal school students self select for parents that don't care or are destitute. (If the parents cared enough presumably they would move into a better district, or at least lie!) If you look at the school statistics, what happens is that all the kids do just fine until about the 4th grade. Presumably, at this point some of the kids get into drugs and violence - the grades, test scores, etc. all take a nose dive (from everyone, including african american kids achieving near 90% - to the african american kids achieving less than 50% in one year).

Most of the information is available online - I actually know some of the people in the Chicago Public School system management, and they are good people really trying to get things fixed, but there is too much politics, too little parental involvement, and too little money.

Re:Not the best idea

[UncleMidriff]

I am one. What's your point?

People need to realize that locking kids up in a basement and throwing away the key is not prerequisite for home education.

I was home schooled K-12, using a curriculum so religious and conservative it would likely make the majority of Slashdot readers barf, and yet, I like to think that I turned out relatively OK. I'm a college graduate, I have a good job as a programmer, and I'm happily married. I even have friends!

The only negative effect that homeschooling had on me socially is this damn inferiority complex I have from people like Mr. Underbirdge never missing an opportunity to tell me and my parents how screwed up I was going to end up for being home schooled.

Seriously, I grew up thinking I was stupid because my friends would constantly whine and gripe about how much homework they had to do and how long they had to be in school each day. They'd tell me that I had it so easy, not having to wake up until 10 and only doing school work for 2-3 hours a day. It wasn't until I took the ACT and scored about 8 or 9 points higher than most of them that I finally started to realize that I probably wasn't so stupid.

That said, I'm sure there are some pretty screwed up home schooled kids out there, just like I'm sure there are some pretty screwed up public schooled kids out there. There is no one solution that fits everyone. I really don't mind if people don't like homeschooling. But what irritates the hell out of me is the assumption that homeschooling = guaranteed social retardation.

Re:Not the best idea

[VGR]

I would posit that the public school system as it stands today is actually more HARMFUL socially to our kids than helpful.

And I would agree with you.

One of the most harmful, even detrimental consequences of a school's warped social atmosphere is the massive (though not total) inhibition of dating. As Slashdotters know all too well, if you're not one of the popular elite, any attempt at dating will not only be rejected but will be the business of 400 other kids within twenty-four hours. When you detain kids for six hours a day, under threat of legal enforcement, it's only natural they'll be extremely bored and behave like this.

But it sure doesn't teach all those non-elite how to interact with the opposite sex in a normal manner. If anything, it teaches them to be separate and distant. I think we all know people who never overcame that handicap.

I can't imagine how this prepares anyone for adult life. When I date someone, it's no one's business except mine, hers, and possibly a few friends and family. I'm obviously not the only one who places value on this, considering the lengths to which celebrities have been known to go in order to get a little privacy where their social lives are concerned.

Like home school

[MxTxL]

In the end, like homeschooling, it boils down to the parents taking responsibility for their children doing the work. Maybe with virtual school the teacher can do a little bit to make students sit stil, but surely it's still mostly on the parents to make sure the work gets done. That is a scary thought since many parents these days completely abdicate their parental duties.

And this doesn't speak to the socialization aspect. Half of what is taught in school isn't just the three R's. The other half is how to become a responsible adult functioning in a society where you must interact with others. Sheltering kids from the outside world does not teach them that.

Thanks for illustrating it

[Moraelin]

Thanks for offering the prime example of why us techies laugh at humanities students. Or at least at the utterly retarded types who spew such cretinous stuff as "Research simply follows the fad of the day." or "Science is 95% opinion then facts" or "What about astrology, the most rediculious of the sciences!"

Guess what, simpleton? Noone considers astrology a science nowadays.

Basically all you've told me is that you're exactly the kind of ignoramus we loathe: the kind that isn't just content to be an ignorant, but tries to drag everyone else down to his level. The kind who isn't just content to have no fucking clue about real science, but _has_ to bandage his ego by looking down upon those who do.

Tired of elitism? Well, that starts at home. Stop acting like an elitist idiot yourself. The whole "I'm so much better than you because I don't understand science" ivory-tower is what gets us techies to reply with elitism right back. Most of us can accept that not everyone has the inclination or in some cases the IQ for science. Sure. Society needs painters and plumbers too. But seeing an idiot trying to present his ignorance and idiocy as proof of superiority _will_ get a sneer from those who do understand why your arguments only betray massive ignorance.

Re:Thanks for illustrating it

[giorgiofr]

I am a humanities student AND a computer geek and I can attest that you are BOTH idiotic know-it-alls who think they're so much better than everyone else. How about you both go down your own road and mind your own business? How about you spend your time LEARNING what you like instead of convincing yourself that it's worth learning in the first place? If you were so sure of your superiority you wouldn't be arguing about it.

Re:Thanks for illustrating it

[syntaxglitch]

Stop to consider what the chances are of someone that flawlessly foolish even knowing /. exists?

Don't waste your time; that was almost certainly a calculated troll, trying to hit every negative stereotype of humanities majors to provoke reactions.

Re:But what about socialising?

[CdXiminez]

Social things learned in school:

Don't be smart around stupid people - they'll come and beat you up for it.
Avoid gatherings of other people - they'll beat you up because you 'looked funny at them'.
Don't speak to classmates - they'll chase you around the school yard for using 'funny words'.
Hate - it's difficult to learn to love people who chase you all the way home.

Should I go on?

I know, this doesn't go for everybody, but I can see that this on-line teaching will do some people a lot of good.

Re:Online Universities

[syntaxglitch]

There's more involved in a university environment than just the final degree. A lot of the value is in being surrounded by other intelligent folks and interacting with professors who know their stuff. In a middle school kids are forced to be there, so there's less benefit (if any) from peer groups, and we all know what happens when you have math or science being taught by someone whose only degree is in "education".

Actually, with all the potential for abuse an online program could have, as with home schooling, if someone comes from that sort of background and still knows their stuff (scores well on standardized tests, etc.) they're probably smarter and/or more self-motivated than someone with an equivalent score from a regular school.

It can work.

[rowama]

The summary quote is misleading. Before I actually read the article, I envisioned hordes of children sitting in front of computers operating some sort of computer based training s/w. If you read the article, the children are not just sitting in front of a computer. There is an entire support structure built around virtualizing the important aspects of their learning experience. The support structure starts with a parent who cares and continues with curricula, equipment, supplies, and facilities provided by the city's education system.

I know that homeschooling works, and works well, because my daughter is homeschooled. She scores very high on achievement tests. She is so socialized (outside of public school), we have to sometimes limit her socializing in order to spend non-educational time with her. When she started high school level curricula, we associated ourselves with an umbrella school for advise, transcripting, focused tutoring, etc. This took some of the anxiety off of us when we started considering college prep issues.

This Chicago effort appears to merge the homeschooling concept with oversight by the city's education system. This closely parallels what we have found to be a very successful combination.

so true

[Adartse.Liminality]

'You can't sit a child in front of a computer and expect him to learn things he needs to succeed in society,'

That's so true it hurts
A basic element of learning-teaching is the teacher, who just can't be replaced, the kids need far more than data, need also affection, support, guidance and motivation, I find hard to believe a computer will provide much of it, not to mention that we might see physical problems later and probably conductual issues.

He and his mother say they look forward to building a better relationship through schoolwork.

A common lie, every teacher knows...that it might be true for a lil' while, but later: "ain't doin' your work".

don't get me started in the lack of arts, music and p.e.

Re:But what about socialising?

[cbelle13013]

There are plenty of other ways to socialize your kid beside sending them to school. You can have them go to Karate two nights a week, soccer two nights, piano/music lessons one night a week, and maybe an art class or two. Then it's up to you as a parent what your child learns, instead of some public school. Plus you'll actually meet the people teaching your child, as opposed to some 23 year old who just graduated and needed a job.

I don't think the homeschoolers of today are the same ones of 25-30 years ago. Most parents I know who intend to homeschool are not religious nuts. They just don't want their kids to go to government schools for obvious reasons.

Re:But what about socialising?

[syntaxglitch]

Uhm. Since when is school the only place for kids to socialize?

Not to mention, that a harmful social environment is potentially worse than no socialization at all. It's fairly easy for a public school to become a Lord of the Flies scenario, with a combination of kids who have to be there, a self-contained social structure with no goal or purpose, and administrators who don't care.

School is supposed to be for learning, anyhow. Let the kids socialize on their own time. Maybe if they actually taught kids things in school instead of "socializing" them, things would work better in the first place.

Put the kool-aid down.

[Shivetya]

And quit parroting the teacher union's crap they spew about home schooling.

Look, anyone can find examples of students both home schooled and public schooled and use that as reasons to support their side of the story. Fact is home school kids do just fine in society, many scoring far higher than their peers.

home schooling is villified by those who fear its results. Common methods include claims of lack of socialization with peers or religious dogma. Usually the "religious angle" is played out more up north than elsewhere.

You can expect similar arguments from the Teachers Unions and those who are held in its thrall to any advance in education which leads to a loss of their power and influence.

Yeah right.

[Anonymous Coward]

These are the same teachers that say, "you cant educate a child at home and expect him/her to get the skills they need to succeed in the world." Yet home schooled kids are far better educated than public school educated kids. Teachers unions will always go against anything that does not use them as the delivery system.

People want alternatives, Public schools suck, Teachers do not do their jobs, administrators do as little as possible to get by, the social atmosphere inside the school is very similar to that of a state prison. Middle School is simply 3 years of cruel punishment to kids and the public schools refuse to do anything to fix it.

Parents are seeking out charter and private schools in droves because of the poor quality of public schools, this is another step that allows the child a huge amount of educational freedom. Unsupervised, yes a kid would rather play than learn something that they would consider useless to them at that time. (Social Studies, English, Math) but with supervision a kid that understands math like it was her native language can accellerate way past everyone else including her teacher and get the education she needs. I remember being berated by a science teacher in school because I disagreed. I brough in a paper that proved that I was right and I was sent to the office for being a smart-ass. Teachers in schools hate it when they encounter a child that is smarter than they are and they lash out at those kids to get them back in line. When a kid knows far more about astronomy and astrophysics than the 8th grade general science teacher knows that teacher should STFU instead of telling the kid to STFU.

I am all for anything that eliminates the bad teachers, and that means upsetting the entire teachers union, so be it.

Private schooled kids are better educated.
Charter schooled kids are better educated.
Home schooled kids are better educated.
finally I will bet that computer schooled kids are better educated.
when compared to public schools.

It is a written in stone fact. only the fools believe otherwise.
Unfortunately, most of the poor can not afford the $200-$300 a month for their kids private school tuition.

Re:But what about socialising?

[professionalfurryele]

Yeah the problem you describe is now very serious. What we need to do is to show kids that being smart is rewarded. Here is how I envision the system working. If there is an incident in school, we just assume that the smart kids were behaving apropriately. I mean no system of 'justice' actually works. In school it is the big kids who rule, in the 'real' world the rich rule. Why not set up our schools so that the individuals who win are the most useful?

Financial Interest

[CharlieG]

Just remember that the Union has a significant interest in opposing ALL charter schools. From what I can see, most teachers unions have never met a Charter School that they liked....

Wonder why? Is it the kids, or is it the jobs/pay of the teachers...

Teacher's Union in Canada

[roman_mir]

In Canada, the Teacher's Union uses its powers to hold this country hostage once in a while. Public school teachers are basically government employees, they get summers for vacations, they get benefits, above average salaries, and they often (just about every year) exercise their union powers on the people of this country. When they strike during the school-year, they are putting millions of families into really difficult situations - the kids have to stay home, someone has to be there or someone has to be hired or a parent has to stay home, if it is a single-parent family, then it is even more difficult (I have no kids, but I see this all the time.) The kids' education suffers, they have nothing to do during the strike, many of them can go to the streets and do whatever, join gangs maybe?

In Ontario, the provincial liberal government is gutless, they always cave in to ANY union, and so they just give away our money for no reason, and the unions know this and they take advantage of this even more than in the rest of the country. Teachers get more 'professional development' days (during business days) in Ontario than anywhere else it seems like and they don't really spend those days for any development, and this happens while in private organizations PD days are taken during weekends. Those who bother to show up for those days don't really learn anything new, or if there is anything, it is all about the administrative part. In reality, teachers have entire summers that could be dedicated to 'improvement' in their profession, but what they do, is get summer jobs and make even more money instead. (they earn all of their money in the winter, but those ARE the money for the entire year, but they get to work 2 jobs and make double during the summer, isn't that great for them?)

So whenever I hear that a teacher's union opens their collective mouths to say something, all I can think of is that the parents, the kids, and the rest of the society is about to get a shaft.

(Ontario, you have to wake up and fire this union, fire those teachers who are lazy and useless and get yourself into a better alternative deal.)

Re:Online Universities

[Shivetya]

you are kidding right?

Why should even some regular college degrees deserve respect? Countless colleges allow students to pass through the system with degrees simply because they excel at sports. Many pass on students who only get through sub-par course.

That college degree doesn't come with a grade point average, is a C student at your local state university going to do as well as someone with a higher average from an online university?

Besides, doesn't this smack of elitism? We still have cases where some degrees are worth more than others. Some colleges are looked down upon because in truth the education they provide is better. Why not discriminate based on the fact that applicant A's football team regulary hands your school's ass to it every year?

Education is what you make of it. Public education is no longer about turning out good students who are well balanced with the skills needed to enter the real world. Its a damn jobs program with a bunch of social engineering thrown in to convince kids that the government knows whats good for them.

Re:Agree Completely

[Lumpy]

As for those that say "you will be working at mcdonalds" ,
I'm going on to so a PhD in socialolgy where I'll be line for tenure
where I have a much more rewarding job then beeing a science freak or
an engineer.

translation : I'll be a manager at a McDonalds.

You do realize that the number of liberal arts phd's around big campuses is huge? I know of 2 people I was good friends with that went to University of Michigan and one has a PHD in political science, the other has a phd in Philosiphy and a phd in music history.

He is in line for tenure as well, 15th in line, in about 15 years he MIGHT get it but right now with some of the cuts made he works part time tutoring students and still lives in the campus housing and looks like a 38 year old gen-X hippie. He is a great friend, but still dreams of driving a bmw and living in the big stone house near campus (IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!)

That is the other path that can and will happen, when financial cuts come the "foofy" classes are the first cut. I can go to any resturant in Ann Arbor and get served by a myriad of Masters and Doctorate degrees.

It's more of an addiction to the campus and College lifestyle than seeking an education. Many of the career students in the wierder degree fields are there to fill their addiction.. IT exists everywhere though. RMS was a career student, and the IT building of almost any campus has some hermit that has several degrees but still lives there. (same for the physics and chemistry building as well.)

I'm just saying that going to be a professor is great, but dont bank on your tenure until you have it in your hand. With your education level you should know that trusting fellow humans is folly at best.

Re:Online Universities

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

If I were to hire an employee, I would disregard any degrees from online universities
 
This is of course rubbish. As someone who has been in the position of hiring I can say there are many factors to consider. To "disregard" a resume based on the university is a disservice to the company and candidate. In more senior positions the education section is almost irrelevant.
 
If we're talking junior technical positions (ie straight out of school) then you will be expected to take a test prior to any sitdown interview. Often that means dozens of candidates in a room with all sorts of diverse backrounds (English majors to CS grads).

Re:Agree Completely

[zolaris]

Not that I want to "kill a dead horse" (yes I am a techie and do like references to things like Dilbert, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc) but I have some issue with what you say. Yes, the 'nerds' as we call ourselves sometimes DO need to step off our soapboxes, but it IS a two way street. I am bothered by your comment :

I'm going on to so a PhD in socialolgy where I'll be line for tenure where I have a much more rewarding job then beeing a science freak or an engineer.[sic]

I got an undergraduate degreee in Ocean Engineering and a Masters in Security Informatics. I LOVED the classes I took in both. Designing and building something (submarines, boats, even shorelines) or analyzing computer security 'stuff' is exciting and rewarding to ME. I chose my career and I love it. I do feel bad for all of those individuals in technical AND non-technical fields that hate what they do and don't find their career rewarding. I can also say that I've taught math to countless middle and high school students and I found that to be very rewarding too. I love the look on a child's face when he or she finally understands something that was a mystery before. I probably will, in a few years, go back to teaching or tutoring, possibly on a volunteer basis.

I will not argue that great things were NOT done in the humanities but the engineering community has brought you innovations you use every day. You typed this message on a computer, where do you think that came from? I'm guessing you use a car or form of public transportation daily other than your feet. Someone had to design and innovate it. Would Willa Cather have built an airplane? No, but I know she DID write some very important works and had some great ideas. You don't HAVE to be a techie to have good ideas, but in the same token you can't dismiss everything technical because you are not.

Anyways, all I have to do to be a engineer wold be to get my MSCE and how hard couyld that be?[sic]

Have you ever looked into the Society of Professional Engineers? For those that are not in the engineering field, many do not know this but in order to be considered a professional engineer there are not one, but two tests you must pass. Now this applies mostly to civil, mechanical and the like but computer engineering and other related engineering fields have tests and they are hard. I passed the first of these two tests (the second you actually need to work for four years under a professional engineer) before you can even take the test. The first test is an 8 hour long test that covers four years of what we learned in college. It's not for everyone. I found it easier than many would because I LIKE the material. Just as some people find it easier to write a novel than I would because that is not where my interests lie. Okay I'll get off my soapbox now too and let someone else on.

Homeschooling

[FJ]

First, let me point out that I have a child who is homeschooling. He is in second grade, so we've only been doing this for 3 years. I was very cautious about this, but my wife really wanted to try it. Virtual elementary schools have been around prior to this. We looked at one when my son started first grade but decided against it.

The most common question we get about it is "what about social skills". A lot of people who homeschool make very conscious efforts to make sure their kids receive social skills. We are involved in co-ops, we do field trips with other homeschool kids, there are sporting activities, and he has other kids in the neighborhood. The best argument I heard about schools & social skills was this: teachers don't want you to be social during classes. When you were growing up were you allowed to talk in class? Of course not. You talked between classes and at lunch. Most of the social skills you received were not tought by a teacher but interaction with other kids. This can be gained outside of school too.

Yes, my son does behave different than some other kids. Some things are good and some are bad. He doesn't really understand that some questions are very awkward to ask in public, he tends to interrupt, and his patience isn't the best. On the other hand, he can talk to any adult much more easily than I ever could and he naturally asks questions if he doesn't understand something. When interacting with other kids I don't really notice a difference. He interacts with his public school & homeschool friends the same way and they play the same games.

Virtual schools have advantages & disadvantages except you get some outside support. Some parents really need that extra support because they don't feel comfortable being on their own.

The biggest benefits to non-traditional learning are the ability to go at your own pace and to change the teaching method if it doesn't work. When we started math with my son we got a really cool math program. It had blocks and videos as well as worksheets. It looked really great to me. He absolutely hated it. We tried for a few weeks and gave up. We switched to another program which had very bright and colorful worksheets but no blocks or videos. He responded much better to it and was able to learn the material much easier. Learning at your own pace is good for him too. There is no being "left behind". Until he understands the subject we don't go to the next.

That all being said, homeschooling isn't for everyone. Some kids just don't respond and need more structure. Some parents don't want the responsibility or can't be home to be the teacher. Even in virtual schools the idea isn't just "sit them in front of a computer and you are done". There is other non-computer stuff in any program I've ever seen. I can't comment on the quality of the Chicago program, but I'd imagine it is the same way. The majority of time isn't computer related. I'm sure it will be less flexible and less "go at your own pace", but that isn't necessarily bad because some kids really need the structure. It depends on the child.

Also remember that things change. The parent or the child may decide to go back to traditional schooling. People and situations change. You can always switch. All 50 states have laws permitting homeschooling. Some are more "interesting" than others, but they all allow it.

There is also one other myth I'd like to dispell. Other than social skills the second most common question is about religion. Not everyone is a religous zelot who homeschools. I'm not even remotely religious. Lots of people do it because they feel it is the best opportunity for their children and not to shelter or block their kids from the outside world.

By the way, another thing which helped convince me that it isn't a bad idea was the fact that a lot of homeschoolers are ex-teachers. You would be amazed how many ex-teachers there are doing this. Every ex-teacher I talk to says that public schools waste time and they spent the vast majority of their time on a few kids in a class.

Better to end up as Ralph, even Piggy than as Jack

[MikeRT]

When I read Lord of the Flies in high school, all of my problems with the public school system suddenly made sense. There is so little adult involvement in K-12 that it is almost like having no adult discipline and guidance. Kids actually **need** socialization around adults and they need it much more than they need "socialization" around other kids. Two kids by themselves teaching each other how to behave is like one blind man trying to lead another.

I don't know if you've forgotten this due to age or a glorified childhood, but little kids are often nasty and cruel toward one another. They need the guiding hand of good adults, not children. There is a difference between letting kids play together and actual socialization.

Re:Online Universities

[Xest]

The UK has a distance learning University called the Open University, nowadays it's courses are based almost entirely online. It also extends into Europe somewhat and even other parts of the world (www.open.ac.uk btw). You're generally assigned a tutor who you submit assignments to online (or by post for some courses that haven't updated yet) and the only time you really have to leave your house is to attend exams or to go to tutorial sessions if you feel you want/need to (these happen like once every 3 weeks or so for an hour or two) but essentially you could do an entire degree remotely bar the exams. Now, I can understand your concerns and the OU maybe an exception to the rule but it is proof that distance learning can and does work. Just to demonstrate how well the OU has done, the OU is the biggest University in Europe and also, the OU is responsible for 25% of Masters degrees in the UK. I think the real issue is seperating scam-like online institutions from the distance learning based institutions like the OU that are extremely credible. Distance learning works for those who have passed the University age and are working full time yet can't afford to give up their job, I'm one of those - I work full time and can't afford to just quit my job and go to Uni for 3years for another degree so I'm doing it with the OU, studying for 30hrs a week I'll be done with my physics degree within 3 years. Also the quality of OU material is absolutely fantastic, it's better than the stuff I've come across at most conventional Unis! I'm biased because the OU has treated me well and I've found it fantastic, and most importantly, it's given me chance to gain a 2nd degree that I'd never have had chance to gain otherwise. I've actually enjoyed it so much I could be tempted to do it again and get a 3rd degree ;) I do realise my experience isn't relevant to the discussion about the social impact, because I did go to a real school, I work a real job and so social skills are gained that way, however when someone makes a blanket statement that they wouldn't hire someone from an online university I feel the point has to be made that online Universities can and do work and that to ignore them in recruitment is ignoring 25% of the UK's Masters degree graduates ;)

Home Education

[drac0n1z]

I was home schooled for 5 years in a foreign country, where I didn't interact with the locals my age. Very much 3rd world, to the extent where kids my age and even older people never before saw white people. When I got back to my own country @ the age of 15 I was not socially adapted to handle a school environment. Socially I was a mess till around the time I turned 21. Children should socialise with their peers otherwise they will have much larger problems when the peer group has moved into adulthood and they havent.

Re:A note to moderators

[WilliamSChips]

Um.. the only sure fire way not to be moderated in a way you don't like is not to post.

This is Slashdot, not Global Thermonuclear Warfare...

Re:Agree Completely

[everphilski]

How do you get the liberal arts student off of your doorstep? Pay him for the pizza.

Re:A note to moderators

[b17bmbr]

wish I had mod points. of course around here this gets modded flamebait, but you are 110% correct. I am a high school history teacher and am thoroughly disgusted with the treatment history gets in our textbooks. It is sanitized, whitewashed, and outright rewritten. Dianne Ravitch (hardly a right-wing ideologue) wrote a great piece a while ago titled: PC textbooks full of skewed history which details the way California (where I teach) purposefully uses history for every reason other than to teach about the past.

Public schools have failed precisely because they are not doing precisely what it is they are required to do. There are many solutions, not the least of which is to eliminate teacher unions (of which I am a member) completely. I can think of no greater conflict of interest than unions lobbying the state on educational issues. There is no concern for educational quality only what is in the teachers' best interests. In fact, I believe that public employees shouldn't be allowed to strike. This is hardly an anti-labor/anti-union position, as public employees (police, fire, teachers) a) chose their profession b) have job security and c) serve vital roles which the market cannot remedy. Unlike say an auto manufacturer who has competitors, is accountable to shareholders, and has to actually market and sell a product, you have no real choice when you dial 911 or send your child to school.

The unions have been infiltrated with very left-wing ideologues and it has permeated every sector of education. Now, before people get upset, just think about those places where "intelligent design" has been adopted into the cuuriculum. Many want that no more than others want Heather has two mommies but it is exactly the same prinicple. I've always believed that privatization of schools is the ultimate answer. In fact, government should stay out of the schools, marriage, business, the internet, etc.

Re:A note to moderators

[MindStalker]

Oddly though, studies show homos make much better parents than straight couples.

Statistically thats true, simply because statistically ANYBODY straight person can become a parent which drags down the statistic for them. Homo couples generally adopt, and its rare and very hard for them to do so in much states, so that bottom of the barrel gay generally isn't allowed to have/keep a child.

inside perspective

[mattavian]

Being a teacher I think I have a unique perspective on this. I'm sure that the online classes will work. Why? The students that are involved with the project are going to be the same ones that have parents that care and are active in their education. Time and time again I've found that to be the biggest factor in education. They would do better then the standard apathetic student sitting at home with a book and a candle. I feel bad for the teachers however, this may be the thing that takes the few students wanting to learn out of a classroom. Often these kids are the ones that make teaching worth it for many of us.

Re:A note to moderators

[IAmTheDave]

There are many solutions, not the least of which is to eliminate teacher unions (of which I am a member) completely. I can think of no greater conflict of interest than unions lobbying the state on educational issues.

I couldn't agree more. My parents, both members of the NEA and NJEA (New Jersey) are basically extorted into paying fees to an agency that hardly ever help in any way, and seem to spend more time lobbying on issues that have nothing to do with education (or the views of my parents.)

Please - this is NOT a push to start a flame war, so realize this post is NOT about abortion. However, at least with the NJEA and definatley with the NEA, for some reason, they lobby HEAVILY on pro-choice decisions in local and national arenas. While it not only confuses me (less aborted babies = more kids in school = more teaching jobs) it's totally outside the realm of anything to do with the education of children or what's in the interest of the teachers who are part of the union in the capacity of doing their jobs.

Teachers unions are so misguided and misdirected that they're almost completely useless. I know that they are certainly there for certain things like arbitration, but I feel that they evey shy away from conflict whenever possible, even discouraging teachers from filing grievances.

I'm rambilng. Point is, I agree with ya.

Re:A note to moderators

[markana]

It's very simple. The NEA and local teacher's unions are the equivalent of the RIAA/MPAA. They're frantically trying to protect their mostly-obsolete delivery system, while compromising the quality of the product. The government school systems are failing their students, yet the educational bureauracy seems to be mostly concerned with maintaining the status quo. I somewhat expect a media campaign linking alternative education (homeschool, charter school, etc.) to child abuse, in the same way that media sharing is called piracy.

It's not about education - it's about maintaining power.

What is this, a Klan rally?

[sirrobert]

First of all, there are two categories here interacting to produce elements of a third category (as the idea is being structured):

1. Home-school kids vs. Public(/Private?)-school kids
2. Religious vs. Nonreligious upbringing.

These two are mixing to produce the category of behavior we're interested in:

• Socially well-adjusted vs. Socially ill-adjusted

I went to public schools my whole life (except for one year in a private school in 6th grade). In college and after, I have known several dozen people (between my age -- now 29 -- and younger -- 21-ish) who were home-schooled. Some of them were Christians, some were not. There were plenty of ill-adjusted homeschool people of both the religious and non-religious variety, and plenty of ill-adjusted people of the home-schooled and public-schooled varieties.

There are two types of disconnect among these groups that are being perceived as identical but are not. On the one hand, there is a social ill-adjustment by which a person is unable to interface with others in social situations due to a lack of exposure and a lack of instruction about social graces. On the other hand, there is a social disjunct arising from a desire to be separate from certain behaviours or experiences viewed as undesireable (profanity, pornography, lude speech, self-righteousness, judgementalness, prudishness, or whatever else they may perceive to be objectionable). In this latter case, the disjunct is often complementary; that is, those who would like to distance themselves from lude speech, for example, may not interact freely around those who use such speech, whereas those who do speak in a way they consider lude may not interact freely around those they consider prudish. In such cases, each tends to perceive the difficulty as coming from the other exclusively.

This is categorically different than the former sort of difficulty, in which there is no reason for the separation -- that is, it is not by choice on any level -- but it is for reason of inability.

Having said this, the cause of the former sort of person -- people who are unable to interact socially -- is parents who do not know how to socialize their kids or instruct them in social matters. There are lots of people who homeschool who don't know how to socialize or instruct their children, and there are lots of people who farm schooling out to the state who don't know how to socialize or instruct their children. There are lots of Christians who don't know how to socialize or instruct there children, and there are lots of non-Christians who don't know how to socialize or instruct their children.

The other difficulty is one of choice. It stems from Christians not wanting to be certain behaviors (whether from weakness or strength or whatever), as well as from non-Christians not wanting to be around certain behaviours (whether from weakness or strength or whatever). It stems from Christians not wanting to accomodate people (Christian or otherwise) who engage in certain behaviors, and non-Christians not wanting to accomodate people (non-Christian or otherwise) who engage in certain behaviors. Some parents -- Chrisitan and non-Christian -- pass on these preferences to their children, often passively, but sometimes actively.

The "loony" behavior to which you have alluded is the latter sort -- choosing things you consider ridiculous to choose (I know you do because you ridicule them by calling them "loony"). Going far down any branch of choice makes the decisions of those on other branches seem ever more peculiar (and I'm not one who is for "moderation at all costs" -- it seems to me we should do something all the way if it's worth it to us). I have a relative who always talks about "those damn Republicans" in such a manner as that he sounds as though he believes they are these impish wretches rubbing their hands together and plotting how best to destroy other people. I have a friend who seem